I wouldn't read anything into what Casey said about backup PG and grizzled veteran. It is literally the same exact thing he has been saying since he got to Toronto. I think he believes if he keeps saying the same shit in the media then maybe Ujiri will do it. A perfect example of how contradictory Casey is being to Ujiri is when Casey said he thinks the team is young enough and needs to get older, while at Ujiri's press conference he said how important it is to have a bench loaded with young talent at the 2nd and 3rd slots at each position. Now that doesn't mean Ujiri won't go that route, but I wouldn't take Casey's comments as an indication of anything Ujiri will do.

To Qasim:

I highly highly highly highly doubt Derozan has anything near the value of Gay around the league. His contract is less per year, that is literally the only thing Derozan has on Gay. Gay's contract is shorter, and he is leaps and bounds the better player, and everyone around the league knows it. Cleveland or Charlotte could sell Gay to their fans as a young All-Star caliber starting SF that could be a mainstay on the team for years to come. You can't do anything like that with DD. You'd just get questioned on why you traded for a mediocre player that is locked up on a somewhat pricey deal for the next 4 years. Basically, players of DD's quality are fairly common in the league, whereas players like Gay are rare commodities.
I don't know if one, both, or none of Gay and DD will be sent out, but I'm sure that Gay will bring more in return and is much more sought after by other teams.

Lastly:
I don't think tank is the right word for what Ujiri might do. He will build, but I expect that building to involve losing more games this season than we did last year due to an influx of young talent and draft picks, not because we're purposely trying to lose. For example, if we traded Gay for the #1 pick this year and a future 1st then I would not call that a tanking move, but a building move. It just so happens that building move wouldn't result in more wins this year, but will in the future. That also shows control of our destiny (trading Gay for known picks), as opposed to just playing Aaron Gray and D-Leaguers and hoping we luck out into the #1 selection (no way in Hell Ujiri does this, sorry Tim. W).

I wouldn't read anything into what Casey said about backup PG and grizzled veteran. It is literally the same exact thing he has been saying since he got to Toronto. I think he believes if he keeps saying the same shit in the media then maybe Ujiri will do it. A perfect example of how contradictory Casey is being to Ujiri is when Casey said he thinks the team is young enough and needs to get older, while at Ujiri's press conference he said how important it is to have a bench loaded with young talent at the 2nd and 3rd slots at each position. Now that doesn't mean Ujiri won't go that route, but I wouldn't take Casey's comments as an indication of anything Ujiri will do.

In the press conference, Ujiri also said that he would have a few conversations with Casey to share "philosophies" among other things. Based on that comment, you've got to think that Casey was commenting(interview) with knowledge of Ujiri's plan.

First .. there is no coach that you bring in to tank. The idea is to lose games .. so I cant imagine what coach we would have brought in where everyone would have confidently said "ah ha, we are tanking!". Maybe vinny del negro or some other horrible coach ... .. but outside of that, the best way to tank is to stick with the status quo.
Having said that .. I hope that Casey gets the memo that he needs to play the young guys (read: T Ross and JV) much more minutes than he did last year.

I too am hoping for a rebuild, but I also don't think that is what will happen, an that has nothing to do with retaining Casey.

It has more to do with what ownership has done with the Jays and Leafs. There is no profit for them in going through years of rebuilding. Imo, they aren't tearing down and rebuilding. They are making moves to be competetive now, and there is no reason to beleive that it will be any different with the Raptors. Also, they have brought in a really good management team to accomplish that. TL has a track record of competing now and not rebuilding. MU has a track record of making good trades, but not necessarily known for rebuilding a team from the ground up.

First .. there is no coach that you bring in to tank. The idea is to lose games .. so I cant imagine what coach we would have brought in where everyone would have confidently said "ah ha, we are tanking!".

In 2011 Raptors went into the season with a plan that they would play to acquire a good pick the following year. Casey was hired that year. Was Casey hired to tank? Of course not. Did he know that tanking was the plan? Yes. In fact he was given the task of implementing a "culture change" while losing which in hindsight, was probably a mistake 'cause they ended up winning more games than they hoped to win. It denied the team a better pick.

In 2011 Raptors went into the season with a plan that they would play to acquire a good pick the following year. Casey was hired that year. Was Casey hired to tank? Of course not. Did he know that tanking was the plan? Yes. In fact he was given the task of implementing a "culture change" while losing which in hindsight, was probably a mistake 'cause they ended up winning more games than they hoped to win. It denied the team a better pick.

Coaches and players are out to win every game. Those that aren't, I don't think many organizations would willingly pay them.

Mangement, on the other hand, are likely to field a losing team if it serves their purpose.

Colangelo's subtle dig at Casey about winning too many games shows this.

Coaches and players are out to win every game. Those that aren't, I don't think many organizations would willingly pay them.

I was responding to the point that mountio made, "a Coach is not brought in to tank" which I agree with. What I'm saying is that a team planning to tank and still hiring a new Coach is not uncommon. The 2011 team fielded a team that was supposed to tank and Casey knew it, not that Casey was instructed to lose.

BTW hoping to see a culture change and lose at the same time was wanting to have the cake and eat it too. The result-Terence Ross.

I was responding to the point that mountio made, "a Coach is not brought in to tank" which I agree with. What I'm saying is that a team planning to tank and still hiring a new Coach is not uncommon. The 2011 team fielded a team that was supposed to tank and Casey knew it, not that Casey was instructed to lose.

BTW hoping to see a culture change and lose at the same time was wanting to have the cake and eat it too. The result-Terence Ross.

*I'm going to start this by saying I dislike the term 'culture change'. Its nothing more than a buzzword with little real or atleast verifiable meaning. But I'll use it anyways to continue with this concepts in this thread.

Terrence Ross was a result of poor decision making by Colangelo (this is not a knock on Ross. This is just Ross as a choice vs other available choices). It had nothing to do with tanking or culture change (although I'd argue it was actual the lack of any real desire to change that drove it)

Had BC drafted BPA instead of for need, the exact same statement would be the quite opposite. "You can have culture change and lose at the same time - the result Andre Drummond"

There is no set rule that winning = culture change, or that not winning = no culture change. What changes the 'culture' is talented players with a desire to win. They do so by going hard during games and in practice while simultaneously being productive enough to actually win.

No 'culture change' was taking place until the exec. at the top was replaced because he refused to replace the players, or types of players, who the teams 'culture' was built around.

The team is one step in the right direction now.

I think keeping Casey this year could mean both tanking or building. It makes sense that they didn't release him because they want to build with, a large portion anyways, of whats here. Casey doesn't strike me as a 'rebuilding' coach mainly because he seems to prefer experienced players, rather than giving players experience. However it also makes sense that if the team is tanking, paying Casey to not coach (while paying the new coach) is pointless. Really its anyones guess whats going to happen.

[QUOTE=Craiger;213945]...No 'culture change' was taking place until the exec. at the top was replaced because he refused to replace the players, or types of players, who the teams 'culture' was built around.../QUOTE]

Actually no. Numerous cases of cultures being changed because someone comes into an organization and demands something more of individuals and gives them a rationale for why they should provide it.

Certainly you can go get players who are more aligned with the culture you want because of their personal values, but people's values change all the time. Goof's get responsible, slackers become hard workers, whiners take on accountability...it happens. Not with anything like the regularity we would like to see, but Casey's first season showed a huge culture change on the team. A defense first mentality, players holding each other accountable etc.

Upgrading the roster doesn't induce immediate culture change, it just provides more talented players, who can continue to slack off on transition, squirt each other with water bottles in the dressing room at halftime, tell jokes while on the bench, whatever. If you think about the Spurs roster, there is a range of talent from gifted to role player, but they all seem to approach the game the same way. I suspect that that is because they share the same culture, driven into them by Pop and their fellow teammates when they first get on the team.

Actually no. Numerous cases of cultures being changed because someone comes into an organization and demands something more of individuals and gives them a rationale for why they should provide it.

What are these cases and how often? I can't think of any team that 'changed its culture' without significant roster change.

Upgrading the roster doesn't induce immediate culture change

And I never claimed it would. As I said it takes both the right players, the right type of players and productive players. But you aren't going to change it by not changing the players who exist in the current culture, how they are viewed or how they are used.

If you think about the Spurs roster, there is a range of talent from gifted to role player, but they all seem to approach the game the same way. I suspect that that is because they share the same culture, driven into them by Pop and their fellow teammates when they first get on the team.

I suspect that aswell - but I think its because they have a great executive group that not only finds good productive players, but also the right types of players. Meanwhile the team itself has been built around the very right types of players (Duncan, Parker, Ginobli) who become the example for everyone else.

Casey's first season showed a huge culture change on the team. A defense first mentality, players holding each other accountable etc

except:

1) that change did not lead to winning
2) did not stick
3) the defensive jump had as much to do with losing Bargnani to injury as anything else (ie. a roster change)
4) who was held accountable? James Johnson?

People made a lot of talk about the 2011/12 season and how things changed. But the single most significant change was Bargnani started hot offensively, got hurt and the team's defense got significantly better because of it. The Raptors were still a bottom 10 team defensively when Bargnani was on the floor, a top 10 without him. He was supposed to get 2 rebounds a quarter, but that didn't happen. Yet he was never held accountable and still expected to be a star and starting PF the following year.

Upgrading the roster doesn't induce immediate culture change, it just provides more talented players, who can continue to slack off on transition, squirt each other with water bottles in the dressing room at halftime, tell jokes while on the bench, whatever. If you think about the Spurs roster, there is a range of talent from gifted to role player, but they all seem to approach the game the same way. I suspect that that is because they share the same culture, driven into them by Pop and their fellow teammates when they first get on the team.

You can argue that part of a player's talent is his disposition and work ethic; so you may not really be upgrading if you get a more physically skilled player who's also lazy and/or an idiot. The smartest teams in the league (Spurs, OKC) certainly recognize this and tend to stay away from those players. This was one of the reasons I hated the Gay trade (apart from the terrible contract). His intensity and effort have been questioned since back in his Uconn days, the two months he played for us confirmed that rep to me. If we're talking about culture change, he's one of the guys that's gotta go.

3) the defensive jump had as much to do with losing Bargnani to injury as anything else (ie. a roster change)

People made a lot of talk about the 2011/12 season and how things changed. But the single most significant change was Bargnani started hot offensively, got hurt and the team's defense got significantly better because of it. The Raptors were still a bottom 10 team defensively when Bargnani was on the floor, a top 10 without him. He was supposed to get 2 rebounds a quarter, but that didn't happen. Yet he was never held accountable and still expected to be a star and starting PF the following year.

Now, to see how significantly better the team's defense got, I checked the immediate month after he got injured.
Raptors DefRtg, per nba.com from jan. 26th 2012 - feb 25th 2012: 102,8 - 13th worst in the league.

Well lets make some significant mentions here.

Bargnani did not only play 13 games, and from the start of the season until Bargnani's 13 games ended (from Dec 26th to Jan 26th), the Raptors played 1/3rd of their games without Bargnani .

Over the first 11 games, the Raptors were ranked 17th in the league, over Bargnani's final 18 games they were 20th. So that includes all but 2 of Bargnani's games simply because the sample is ridiculously small (most teams only played 1 game vs the Raptors 2 games but the Raptors did end up 7th over that 2 day period).

The 6 games Bargnani missed in January they ranked 11th, over the next stretch of missed games 15th, and the final stretch 8th

Now none of that is perfect because it a bunch of small samples (stretchs of games the Raptors played) compared against other small samples (stretchs of games everyone else played).

But none the less, there you have it.

As per NBA drtg calculation, its definetely different than basketballreference.

Toronto came in ranked 14th in overall D (at 104.5), vs 12th in NBA.com (101.5). Their drtg for Bargnani was 106 vs 103.3 for Bargnani for the season. 82games.com also puts Bargnani at a +3.1 on/off court defense rating. (Raptors defense improved over 3 pts per 100 possession by him not being on the floor) Which adds further support to my statement

So I may have been off by a spot or two, Raps were likely 18th or 19th overall with Bargnani playing games (depending on whose drtging one is using - but close either way) and therefore just outside of the bottom 10, but my statement still stands:

the defensive jump had as much to do with losing Bargnani to injury as anything else

Now I'm not sure what 'Timming' means, but if it means a statement supported by statistics and numbers, I'm guess I did .

People made a lot of talk about the 2011/12 season and how things changed. But the single most significant change was Bargnani started hot offensively, got hurt and the team's defense got significantly better because of it.

I have the distinct impression that this statement was about the first sequence of games he played.

Sidepoint: I don't get the differences between a few stats between different sites; only looking on the surface they should be the same. Hard to have any trust in them if they are pretty different.

Timming usually involves writing long pieces (much longer than yours), generally refered to as 'novels', as in "God I hope he doesn't write another novel while saying the exact same thing." It also involves repeating the same idea over and over again (as I said). The most telling parts of Timming though, are twofold. One, that it's driven by a blind ambition to prove a few particular ideas over and over and to approve of any argument that supports these ideas, in ill regard of the validity of these arguments. And two, an utter refusal to admit at any time or any moment that there might be a fault to some part of the reasoning.

Your posts aren't Timming, but this one just reminded me of that great era.

...And two, an utter refusal to admit at any time or any moment that there might be a fault to some part of the reasoning...

"Casey's first season showed a huge culture change on the team. A defense first mentality, players holding each other accountable etc""except:

1) that change did not lead to winning
2) did not stick
3) the defensive jump had as much to do with losing Bargnani to injury as anything else (ie. a roster change)
4) who was held accountable? James Johnson?"

"change didn't lead to winning" means change occurred
"change didn't stick" means change occurred
"the defensive jump had as much to do with losing Bargnani to injury" red herring and not supported by stats
"who was held accountable? James Johnson?" well, yea, as well as others who got playing time as their production dictated. I would say that the emergence of Amir this past season was to a significant extent a result of his effort the previous one. Unlike Ed Davis who rode the pine largely because of effort. When he started putting in the effort Ed got PT and that made him an attractive trade chip.

I would add that "Timming" also includes self-references to past statements/posts in every other sentence. That's the one that always gets me....

That said, I'm actually a fan of much of what he writes.

Soft Euro wrote:

You said

I have the distinct impression that this statement was about the first sequence of games he played.

Sidepoint: I don't get the differences between a few stats between different sites; only looking on the surface they should be the same. Hard to have any trust in them if they are pretty different.

Timming usually involves writing long pieces (much longer than yours), generally refered to as 'novels', as in "God I hope he doesn't write another novel while saying the exact same thing." It also involves repeating the same idea over and over again (as I said). The most telling parts of Timming though, are twofold. One, that it's driven by a blind ambition to prove a few particular ideas over and over and to approve of any argument that supports these ideas, in ill regard of the validity of these arguments. And two, an utter refusal to admit at any time or any moment that there might be a fault to some part of the reasoning.

Your posts aren't Timming, but this one just reminded me of that great era.

i was thinking that all it said about keeping Casey was basically there wasn't enough time to actually revamp and reshape the roster so why throw away another ? (not even sure what he makes) since there will likely be an amnesty used at some point but even that is just speculation..... Barnangi sitting with 22 mil owed for 2 more years is not going to be an easy move as much as many of us would like to see it happen,Kleiza at 4.6 mill is an easier pill to swallow but that's still a fair chunk of coin to just throw into the wind. the roster at 73 mill for 12 players leaves no wiggle room but gets down to 61 mill for 8 next season so i can see him hanging onto Barnagni+Kleiza for now hoping they can develop some trade value and if not then Kleiza runs out and it's 11.5 to write of the Primo pasta stud which puts it at 50 mill for 7 for 2014-15 and then we should be able to see some better manouvering space for Ujuri to hopefully weave some magic ...... i'm not sure he can make a whole lot happen sooner but i am hoping that Casey is part of the vanishing that takes place after this season

I have the distinct impression that this statement was about the first sequence of games he played.

Sidepoint: I don't get the differences between a few stats between different sites; only looking on the surface they should be the same. Hard to have any trust in them if they are pretty different.

Timming usually involves writing long pieces (much longer than yours), generally refered to as 'novels', as in "God I hope he doesn't write another novel while saying the exact same thing." It also involves repeating the same idea over and over again (as I said). The most telling parts of Timming though, are twofold. One, that it's driven by a blind ambition to prove a few particular ideas over and over and to approve of any argument that supports these ideas, in ill regard of the validity of these arguments. And two, an utter refusal to admit at any time or any moment that there might be a fault to some part of the reasoning.

Your posts aren't Timming, but this one just reminded me of that great era.

Well I'd have to say I gave you the wrong impression then. My statement was within the context of what Puffer was making reference to, that is the 'change in culture' due to Casey in 2011/12. I was trying to point out that the perceived 'culture change' was really still based on the player(s) (and specifically Bargnani since he was the teams 'franchise player') and how the team saw him never changed.

Casey may have changed the pace and the focus, but the culture still remained the same. Bargnani never maintained his 13 games offensively, the teams defense improved mainly because of Bargnani missing time, accountability never took place. All things Casey, at one point or another got credit for, and was part of the 'culture building' fans thought was going on.

The 'culture change' during that season being talked about (then and now) was really just a random stretch of a games, an injury, and alot of talk. It wasn't an actual change in culture. This was supported with how this season went.